The use of the word “traditional” indicates a static identity which allows outsiders to co-opt cultural practice.
Paul Nadasdy, Department of Anthropology, The Johns Hopkins University, 1999
(“THE POLITICS OF TEK: POWER AND THE 'INTEGRATION' OF KNOWLEDGE”, Arctic Anthropology; 1999, Vol. 36 Issue 1/2, p1, 18p) [Ha]
Morrow and Hensel speak directly to the term "traditional," which, as used and understood by most non-natives, has the effect of assuming that cultural practice is frozen at a particular point in time(usually the distant past). This allows the dismissal of more recent practice, however consistent it may actually be with local beliefs and values, as "inauthentic," giving non-native resource managers and others the power to define, in important ways, what constitutes "authentic" native culture and to judge and act upon the behavior of aboriginal people accordingly. To illustrate this they recount a case in which two Yup'ik boys were charged with shooting a muskox out of season (Morrow and Hensel 1992:40-41). Muskoxen are rarely found around the village in question, so the boys had consulted the village elders for guidance before shooting it. The elders had advised the boys to shoot the animal, because it had offered itself to them and might be offended if they did not. The boys shot the animal and the meat was distributed within the village in a culturally accepted manner. Thus, they interpreted and acted upon the unusual appearance of the muskox in a manner that was consistent with local Yup'ik ideology. Yet, the judge in the case rejected a defense based on "customary and traditional" practice and ruled against the boys on the grounds that muskoxen are not traditional game animals in the area.
This illustrates how the idea of "tradition" can be used by non-natives to deny the adaptability and dynamism of aboriginal culture. Many non-natives view changing practices and lifestyles in aboriginal communities as "evidence" that traditional knowledge is disappearing. This allows them to discount the opinions and knowledge of aboriginal people who do not live according to their preconceived notions of a traditional aboriginal lifestyle. More than once I have heard a non-native dismiss an aboriginal person's claim to possess traditional knowledge with a statement like, "He doesn't have any traditional knowledge. He went to school and drives a truck and a skidoo just like me." Use of the modifier "traditional" enables people to hold such views by implying that aboriginal culture is static. This allows them, like the judge in the above example, to deny that First Nation people have the ability to adapt to new circumstances without abandoning their culture altogether. Use of "traditional" also makes it easy for scientists and resource managers to disregard the possibility that aboriginal people might possess distinct cultural perspectives on modern industrial activities such as logging or mining.
Customary is better to describe the culture than traditional. It indicates continuing and adaptive practices.
Australian Indigenous Law Reporter, 1999
(“Indigenous Rights In Traditional Knowledge And Biological Diversity: Approaches To Protection”, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AILR/1999/40.html) [Ha] The use of the terms ‘traditional lifestyles’, ‘traditional cultural practices’, and ‘traditional knowledge and technologies’ in the CBD could be interpreted to imply the exclusion of many indigenous communities which have not retained their direct connections with lands and resources, but which nonetheless wish to protect and preserve their knowledge and innovations.[9] The implications of the use of the term ‘traditional’ in the context of discussions about indigenous ecological knowledge is a problematic one, as will be discussed below. The use of the term ‘customary’ in Article 10(c) possibly has a more appropriate sense than ‘traditional’, since it more typically implies a set of continuing and adaptive practices which are informed by cultural rules and which are transferable to a variety of situations and usages.
The word “traditional” marginalizes indigenous culture.
Australian Indigenous Law Reporter, 1999
(“Indigenous Rights In Traditional Knowledge And Biological Diversity: Approaches To Protection”, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AILR/1999/40.html) [Ha] The word ‘tradition’ is often used to denote lifestyles, cultures, knowledge and practices that were used in the past, or which belong to the time before the arrival of Europeans.[12] Reference to indigenous knowledge, as ‘traditional knowledge’ does not necessarily mean that it belongs to the past. This knowledge is continuous, and it evolves and adapts to suit changes in living situations. The term ‘tradition’ is also sometimes used to contrast a type of knowledge which differs from modern science. In this sense, the term ‘lore’, or ‘folklore’ is sometimes employed to denote indigenous cultural knowledge and practices, and to distinguish these from Western ‘science’ or ‘law’. These terms are, however, sometimes pejorative, and serve only to perpetuate the linguistic and discursive marginalisation of indigenous cultures.[13]
The word “traditional” implies indigenous people are stuck in the past and excludes communities.
Australian Indigenous Law Reporter, 1996
(“The Biodiversity Convention: The Concerns of Indigenous Peoples”, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AILR/1996/84.html) [Ha]
Another aspect of the reference to indigenous peoples comes in the phrase 'embodying traditional lifestyles'. The concept of 'traditional' is highly problematic in this contest. Usually the term refers to beliefs or customs which are handed down from the past. The imprecision of this meaning gives the impressionthat article 8j only applies to indigenous peoples who are isolated, fossilised in some cultural time-warp living in a never changing present. This idea of 'traditional' has been criticised by indigenous peoples, as well as anthropologists and lawyers, because it does not reflect the world as it is. All cultures change. Our concern is that the term 'traditional' is being used to exclude peoples who has adapted their lifestyle to reflect the contemporary and continuing colonial situation in which we find ourselves.
The use of the word “traditional” indicates a static identity which allows outsiders to co-opt cultural practice.
Paul Nadasdy, Department of Anthropology, The Johns Hopkins University, 1999
(“THE POLITICS OF TEK: POWER AND THE 'INTEGRATION' OF KNOWLEDGE”, Arctic Anthropology; 1999, Vol. 36 Issue 1/2, p1, 18p) [Ha]
Morrow and Hensel speak directly to the term "traditional," which, as used and understood by most non-natives, has the effect of assuming that cultural practice is frozen at a particular point in time (usually the distant past). This allows the dismissal of more recent practice, however consistent it may actually be with local beliefs and values, as "inauthentic," giving non-native resource managers and others the power to define, in important ways, what constitutes "authentic" native culture and to judge and act upon the behavior of aboriginal people accordingly. To illustrate this they recount a case in which two Yup'ik boys were charged with shooting a muskox out of season (Morrow and Hensel 1992:40-41). Muskoxen are rarely found around the village in question, so the boys had consulted the village elders for guidance before shooting it. The elders had advised the boys to shoot the animal, because it had offered itself to them and might be offended if they did not. The boys shot the animal and the meat was distributed within the village in a culturally accepted manner. Thus, they interpreted and acted upon the unusual appearance of the muskox in a manner that was consistent with local Yup'ik ideology. Yet, the judge in the case rejected a defense based on "customary and traditional" practice and ruled against the boys on the grounds that muskoxen are not traditional game animals in the area.
This illustrates how the idea of "tradition" can be used by non-natives to deny the adaptability and dynamism of aboriginal culture. Many non-natives view changing practices and lifestyles in aboriginal communities as "evidence" that traditional knowledge is disappearing. This allows them to discount the opinions and knowledge of aboriginal people who do not live according to their preconceived notions of a traditional aboriginal lifestyle. More than once I have heard a non-native dismiss an aboriginal person's claim to possess traditional knowledge with a statement like, "He doesn't have any traditional knowledge. He went to school and drives a truck and a skidoo just like me." Use of the modifier "traditional" enables people to hold such views by implying that aboriginal culture is static. This allows them, like the judge in the above example, to deny that First Nation people have the ability to adapt to new circumstances without abandoning their culture altogether. Use of "traditional" also makes it easy for scientists and resource managers to disregard the possibility that aboriginal people might possess distinct cultural perspectives on modern industrial activities such as logging or mining.
Customary is better to describe the culture than traditional. It indicates continuing and adaptive practices.
Australian Indigenous Law Reporter, 1999
(“Indigenous Rights In Traditional Knowledge And Biological Diversity: Approaches To Protection”, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AILR/1999/40.html) [Ha]
The use of the terms ‘traditional lifestyles’, ‘traditional cultural practices’, and ‘traditional knowledge and technologies’ in the CBD could be interpreted to imply the exclusion of many indigenous communities which have not retained their direct connections with lands and resources, but which nonetheless wish to protect and preserve their knowledge and innovations.[9] The implications of the use of the term ‘traditional’ in the context of discussions about indigenous ecological knowledge is a problematic one, as will be discussed below.
The use of the term ‘customary’ in Article 10(c) possibly has a more appropriate sense than ‘traditional’, since it more typically implies a set of continuing and adaptive practices which are informed by cultural rules and which are transferable to a variety of situations and usages.
The word “traditional” marginalizes indigenous culture.
Australian Indigenous Law Reporter, 1999
(“Indigenous Rights In Traditional Knowledge And Biological Diversity: Approaches To Protection”, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AILR/1999/40.html) [Ha]
The word ‘tradition’ is often used to denote lifestyles, cultures, knowledge and practices that were used in the past, or which belong to the time before the arrival of Europeans.[12] Reference to indigenous knowledge, as ‘traditional knowledge’ does not necessarily mean that it belongs to the past. This knowledge is continuous, and it evolves and adapts to suit changes in living situations. The term ‘tradition’ is also sometimes used to contrast a type of knowledge which differs from modern science. In this sense, the term ‘lore’, or ‘folklore’ is sometimes employed to denote indigenous cultural knowledge and practices, and to distinguish these from Western ‘science’ or ‘law’. These terms are, however, sometimes pejorative, and serve only to perpetuate the linguistic and discursive marginalisation of indigenous cultures.[13]
The word “traditional” implies indigenous people are stuck in the past and excludes communities.
Australian Indigenous Law Reporter, 1996
(“The Biodiversity Convention: The Concerns of Indigenous Peoples”, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AILR/1996/84.html) [Ha]
Another aspect of the reference to indigenous peoples comes in the phrase 'embodying traditional lifestyles'. The concept of 'traditional' is highly problematic in this contest. Usually the term refers to beliefs or customs which are handed down from the past. The imprecision of this meaning gives the impression that article 8j only applies to indigenous peoples who are isolated, fossilised in some cultural time-warp living in a never changing present. This idea of 'traditional' has been criticised by indigenous peoples, as well as anthropologists and lawyers, because it does not reflect the world as it is. All cultures change. Our concern is that the term 'traditional' is being used to exclude peoples who has adapted their lifestyle to reflect the contemporary and continuing colonial situation in which we find ourselves.